The united states has the largest and most complex military right now. It uses this to influence economic situations in our favor. This is done through garrisons and proxy wars, typically. The result is typical of any other Empire that has ever existed. Funnelling wealth from other nations into our own. This is the only thing maintaining our current standard of living. The reason for this is that the wealth brought on by the empire raised the standard of living so high, that the costs of production grew with it. Thus you get the outsourcing to other nations. Rolling back the empire would destroy our standard of living and our economy. At this point it is only a matter of time, with hawks clamoring to hold on to what we have while we can, and others thinking we can roll back our influence with no consequences. We do not possess the domestic economy to keep us from collapse.

The united states has the largest and most complex military right now. It uses this to influence economic situations in our favor. This is done through garrisons and proxy wars, typically. The result is typical of any other Empire that has ever existed. Funnelling wealth from other nations into our own. This is the only thing maintaining our current standard of living. The reason for this is that the wealth brought on by the empire raised the standard of living so high, that the costs of production grew with it. Thus you get the outsourcing to other nations. Rolling back the empire would destroy our standard of living and our economy. At this point it is only a matter of time, with hawks clamoring to hold on to what we have while we can, and others thinking we can roll back our influence with no consequences. We do not possess the domestic economy to keep us from collapse.

i'm sorry, but this is completely made up bull****.

our declining economic fortunes as of late have absolutely nothing to do with geopolitics.

While I don't support big military rollbacks, I don't see how removing bases from places like korea or japan effects our economy in the long run at all.

We are not an agrarian economy. We don't derive our fortunes from land use.

How can you actually suggest a govt that spends what 3+ trillion a year is limited? Libertarians were not happy with the previous admin either, hence teaparty. But the teaparty has been mischaracterized as against democrats by the MSM. They are against an over reaching bloated government period.

How can you actually suggest a govt that spends what 3+ trillion a year is limited? Libertarians were not happy with the previous admin either, hence teaparty. But the teaparty has been mischaracterized as against democrats by the MSM. They are against an over reaching bloated government period.

Go back and read my post about government debt vs. new government spending...I've already proven that new spending has decreased significantly since 2010.....

Elaborate. I'm not seeing what you are seeing. I'd rather not call bull**** on typical economist thinking where generally everything external (IE geopolitics) which influences economic situations is ignored.

Technology reduces the amount of laborers you need and increases your production and your capital. Problem is, it reduces the ability of the laborer to purchase the goods resulting in over production. This typically leads to deflation and high unemployment. Arguably where we are at now. We can produce all we want but without a buyer, we are dead in the water. Which is of course ignoring the fact that the costs to upstart production facilities required large extractions of capital. The point is, this isn't very sustainable without some outside generation of revenue from which to extract capital. This certainly does not explain how we've managed to keep our standard of living so high amidst the current climate.

How can you actually suggest a govt that spends what 3+ trillion a year is limited? Libertarians were not happy with the previous admin either, hence teaparty. But the teaparty has been mischaracterized as against democrats by the MSM. They are against an over reaching bloated government period.

No the teaparty was a bunch of bat**** crazies who couldn't appeal to anyone except bat**** crazies. You can try to blame the media for their shortcomings though.

Technology reduces the amount of laborers you need and increases your production and your capital. Problem is, it reduces the ability of the laborer to purchase the goods resulting in over production. This typically leads to deflation and high unemployment. Arguably where we are at now. We can produce all we want but without a buyer, we are dead in the water. Which is of course ignoring the fact that the costs to upstart production facilities required large extractions of capital. The point is, this isn't very sustainable without some outside generation of revenue from which to extract capital. This certainly does not explain how we've managed to keep our standard of living so high amidst the current climate.

no

it frees up labor resources to be employed in other productions, or it simply increases the output of that existing labor making us all richer.

if we do suffer from a general glut the solution is to just print more money

I know one libtard who is desperate after Romney kicked Obama's *** in the first debate. This is hilarious.

__________________

"It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it.
Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness." - George Washington